Sunday, March 31, 2013

HAPPY EASTER! Dumping on Carson!

A 'fatwa' cannot be issued by a thin Muslim!
We were sufficiently exposed to Obama during the 2008 campaign but most gave little weight to his ideas because the majority of voters were turned off by GW and were enamored with Obama's golden tongue.

Matters are not so golden now but most continue to ignore reality because Obama remains the darling of the media and news folks and they are unwilling to bash him as they did GW and most anyone with an R at the end of their name.

The R message is preferable to the D one. It has proven to be so time and again but many of the R's do not adhere to their espoused principles whereas the D's are more than willing to adhere to their's because it means spend and spend and spend and requires little if any discipline. People love the prospect of a free lunch.

Also the R's got involved in digging their own grave by espousing their extreme social views and the D's hammered them but escaped being hammered themselves for their own extreme views.

 D's spend and far too many R's do as well all the while calling the D's to task for their acts of irresponsibility. The public is not stupid and/or blind.  They see the hypocrisy in what the R's do but, being on the take, they overlook the danger of  the D's policies.

Being a super wealthy nation, it takes time for the walls to fall but they inevitably will if we continue along our current profligate path.

It is axiomatic - you cannot continue to spend beyond your ability to repay and/or finance. You cannot dumb down your society and you cannot destroy the family unit and act as if morality is beyond comprehension. All of these trends take time to burrow their way in a societies' psyche but they eventually cannot be ignored because they have a cumulative and pernicious effect.

We are fast approaching that period as evidenced by our high rate of unemployment, increasing dependency upon food stamps, our historically slow recovery, our mounting debt and our decline as a world power.

The causal effect has been building for decades and cannot all be laid at Obama's feet.  However, his lunatic policies and failed management has  hastened their appearance.

This is a fact and it will become increasingly evident as we move through his second term and experience the consequences of his presidency. In some ways one might argue Obama is learning but even if he shows he is it does not take but a nano second before he reverts to his radical ways and thinking.

The leopard just cannot change his spots! (See 1 and 1a below.)
Israeli gas begins to flow. (See 2 below.)
A lesson about the dangers of freedom. (See 3 below.)
Efraim Inbar believes Israel's apology to Turkey was a mistake.  Time will tell whether he is right but I believe he has over stated the case for concern.(See 4 below.)
Fund on Carson's banning.  (See 5 below)
Truly getting bugged!  (See 6 below.)
1)Dangerous Times: America will Survive Obama
By James Lewis

Can America survive the age of O? Many conservatives are worried sick.
Some friends invited me to their Passover seder the other night, and for the first time I really paid attention to the meaning of the words. As you know, the seder celebrates the liberation of the Hebrew people -- the Jews -- from oppression and slavery in Egypt around the first millennium BCE. There has long been debate about the accuracy of that history, but skip that for now.
Ask yourself why liberation from slavery has dominated Jewish and later Christian thought for three thousand years? Jesus' Last Supper was a seder ceremony. Black churches used the Egyptian slavery of the children of Israel as a model for their own experiences of slavery and liberation. So have other liberation movements, including the Abolitionists and the American founders.
The Jewish flight from Egyptian slavery was a model of human liberation in the West, until Karl Marx twisted liberty into tyranny. But the struggle between freedom and control freaks is universal. It can be found in the Epic of Gilgamesh and in the family hell created by kids during teenage rebellion. Freedom is a basic yearning of the human spirit, and so is control freakery.
Now we have a president who confuses slavery and liberty, most obviously in the case of the Islamist Spring, which is certainly not an Arab Spring, since in Syria alone nearly 100,000 Arabs have killed each other by now. Some Spring!
To make the results clear beyond question, the Morsi regime in Egypt has just imposed a Sharia constitution that drops the provision against slavery. The reason for that is Islamic law: the Quran describes Mohammed raiding caravans and small towns to steal slaves, including his child bride. The Islamist world still applies slavery to wives and daughters. Thomas Jefferson tried to stop Libyan slave raiding of American merchant ships off the shores of Tripoli, but they never quite got the point.
In Islam it is not freedom but complete submission that is emphasized. Islam is radically different from Judaism and Christianity. It is a desert nomad religion. It reflects that culture.
Domestically, Obama is trying to create a Eurosocialist centralized economy. But in the liberal paradise of Europe the socialist model is failing right in front of our eyes today. Millions of people in Italy and Greece have had their incomes slashed in half and their taxes increased. The Euro is failing in all the weaker economies of Europe. The standard demagogic propaganda of Eurosocialism -- calling one's opponents racists and planetary poisoners -- is failing. In a few years the Arab-Iranian oil monopoly will crumble, when shale gas takes over its market share. Countries around the world are frantically searching for shale now that it can be converted into clean hydrocarbons. That will eliminate Islamist OPEC control of oil and allow freedom to emerge again.
Everywhere the Arab Spring has sprung, Islamist tyranny has replaced relative freedom -- for women most of all. Turkey used to be a modern country until the Islamofascists took over. Egypt used to be relatively tolerant, and kept the 30-year peace treaty with Israel, until Obama told Mubarak to resign. Wherever the Muslim world was poised between modernism and tradition, now the reactionary patriarchs are in control of hundreds of millions of people. Behind a solid wall of media censorship, women are being abused, intimidated, and beaten, with the official approval of imams and mullahs. Read the books of Ayaan Hirsi Ali if you have any doubts about that. Our feminists are playing deaf, but they know, they know. Under Obama the feminist movement has colluded in the enslavement of Muslim women in the "Arab Spring." (Just consider Naomi Wolf's new job with Al Jazeera.)

Pre-Obama, there were genuine movements towards modernity in the Muslim world, beginning with Turkey in 1922. Post-Obama, half a billion women are likely to be openly abused if they venture outside of the house without a male escort, much more vulnerable to blame for being sexually abused by the "justice" of Shariah law, and much more oppressed by the last nasty patriarchy in the world. Thank you, Liberator Obama.
Thomas Jefferson and Abe Lincoln would never, ever have gone along with the renewed fascist control of the Muslim world.
At the UN, 57 Muslim member regimes routinely smear and slander Israel and America, with European and American acquiescence. Brain-locked liberals around the world think this is all fine, and Obama the Messiah is beyond criticism.
Obama is all in favor of the Islamist Spring, because, whether he is Muslim or not, he is an Islamist sympathizer. There is no reasonable doubt anymore.
This is the worst news about an American president since the rise of Stalin, who also penetrated the U.S. with his agents.
My question is whether it will spell an end to the America we have known.
I think America will survive and ultimately win.
The reason is that control freaks are always self-deluded. Freedom is a yearning of the human spirit in America, but it is not limited to America.
No control freak in the world can really run a giant national economy, much less the world as a whole. People have tried to do such things for thousands of years. In general, centralized control fails, just as the Soviet command economy failed.
What about ObamaCare? Nationalized medicine will elect a lot of Democrats. Ordinary people will learn to get around the inevitable medical rationing, the way they do in Europe. We will all become Italians. Medical vacations abroad will offer an increasingly attractive alternative to American socialized medicine. Private medical care is always being tried in Europe, and some of it works very well. Now it will become global, with private medicine competing with nationalized bureaucracy. Mexico is already becoming a medical travel destination, with international approval for some of its medical centers.

Even in the face of Obamanism, the high-tech revolution is increasingly hard to control. Lenin placed all his technological control bets on electrification of the Soviet Union. When a new industrial revolution commenced with the appearance of cheap computers, the Soviets could never keep up.

When shale technology (invented in America) begins to work in Poland, the Eastern Med, China, and Ireland, the Greens will suddenly decide that natural gas is good for us. Their favorite control whip won't work anymore.
The biotech revolution is exploding, along with space travel, web talk, and a hundred other new and hard-to-control inventions.
Even today the stock market is rising, a leading indicator of growth. The market is already discounting the expected effects of ObamaCare.
Will it work? Not forever. But it will continue the long, long struggle between control freaks and regular people. Just think Soda Jerk Bloomberg in New York, who has now decided to control restaurant portion sizes in the city. Will that work? Of course not.
So -- will American freedom survive Obama?
I think so, yes. But the country will look very different when the uproar dies down.
Conservatives should think globally, and mobilize the forces of freedom around the world. They exist. Every time an impoverished African buys a cellphone the global free market expands. We must find freedom-loving peoples, make strong alliances, and resist the control freaks, who also exist around the world.
The Cold War was won by a Western alliance that finally won the sympathies of regular people in the Soviet Empire. The Evil Empire crumbled from within. All it took was a unified front by the West combined with its own internal protest movement.
The Long Jihad war can be won the same way. With instant globalization there is no other way. This is an ideological war, and free peoples have won such struggles before.
As for American conservatives, we should heed Winston Churchill, who saw very bad times indeed:
"Never give in -- never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy."

As Obamacare begins to roll out, its champions are beginning to have to confront reality. But because they’re getting a lot of leeway and protection from the political press, the results of this confrontation with the consequences of the law’s poor design and misguided economic assumptions often take the form of little nuggets of truth buried in mountains of frantic, wishful obfuscation. Such was the little nugget buried in the middle of a story that was itself buried in the back of the A section of last Friday’s New York Times.

The story was about the enormous challenges of implementing the law, and while it was careful to inform us (in the mouths of unnamed “supporters of the law”) that a lot of these problems are surely functions of the fact that “President Obama has done little to trumpet its benefits, educate the public or answer the critics,” it also notes the following curious fact:
Mr. Obama scored his biggest legislative achievement exactly three years ago when he signed the Affordable Care Act. But this week the administration cautioned officials to be careful about suggesting that the law would drive down costs.
After extensive research, the administration said it was unwise to tell consumers that they could get “health insurance that fits your budget.” That message, it said, is “seen as highly motivational, but not as believable.
This makes it sound like the “extensive research” in question was research into public opinion, which it may well have been. But of course, the more fundamental reason “to be careful about suggesting that the law would drive down costs” is that no one really expects it to do so — not even the administration.

Administration officials and many others on the left who talk about slowing health costs in the coming years never really attribute that expectation in any concrete way to the new law. Rather, they point to the fact that the growth of health costs has slowed a bit during the recession and the painfully slow recovery of the past few years, and they simply expect that slow rate to continue even as they simultaneously expect the economy to recover much more robustly in the coming years.

It’s very important to understand just how much the Left now hangs on this very implausible expectation about health costs. It is at the core of the Democrats’ fiscal arguments, and at the core of their optimistic assumptions about how Obamacare will work out. 

That expectation is, to begin with, what allows Paul Krugman and others (including administration officials) to suggest that we just don’t have to worry about the deficit and debt at this point because they will be pretty stable for about a decade before beginning a catastrophic rise that would crush the economy. That’s what amounts to fiscal optimism these days, and it’s the essence of the Democrats’ resistance to entitlement reform. It is embodied, for instance, in this chart that you’d find if you trudged through the president’s 2013 budget proposal all the way to the 510-page “analytical perspectives” volume that was released with the budget:
This projection, which predicts an epic disaster for the American economy if we remain on our current fiscal course in the long run, is, to repeat, a very rosy view, since it suggests we have about ten years of relative stability (if at a high level of debt) in which to change course before the steep upward trajectory of debt resumes — although the people who use this figure somehow use it to argue against changing course. But in any case, even this sorry excuse for optimism is only made possible by the notion that the growth of health costs won’t soon return to even its postwar norm, let alone to its norm of the last two decades. It assumes, for instance, that Medicare spending will only be 3.3 percent of GDP in 2020, while the Congressional Budget Office assumes it will be 4.2 percent of GDP — a huge difference. And it’s a difference that has a massive effect on medium and long-term expectations. The CBO uses somewhat less rosy assumptions (but still assumes health-cost growth will take a while to resume), and so expects federal debt to reach 200 percent of GDP not in 2080 but in 2037 — again, a huge difference, which means the CBO sees a far steeper rise in deficits and debt in the near and medium term.

But the optimistic assumptions about health-care costs have much more immediate consequences too. The relative stability projected in that chart for the next decade is simply assumed, it is not asserted to be a function of any particular reform in Obamacare. In fact, it is assumed in the administration’s expectations of how the Obamacare rollout itself will work out, and therefore allows them to skirt over two huge problems with the law’s design.

The first is that, unless health costs grow very slowly and keep the growth of Medicare costs very low, Obamacare’s additional price controls (in the form of the IPAB) would have to kick in, and, because they are only allowed to take the form of across-the-board rate cuts for providers, they would result in drastically reduced access to health care for seniors. The actuaries of the Medicare program (who work for Barack Obama) have projected that this would require payment rates for doctors in Medicare to dip well below Medicaid rates and keep falling. Here’s how they see it:
We know that Medicaid’s low payment rates cause many doctors to refuse Medicaid patients, and therefore make it difficult for many poor Americans to find health care. Taking Medicare rates below that level should have similar, but even more drastic, effects. It’s not even worth trying to think through the details of what that would look like because it would simply never happen — we’ve seen that far smaller cuts than that are undone each year through the “doc fix” and there is no way doctors or seniors would put up with such blunt across-the-board cuts and such a loss of access to care. The only way to really avoid that mess is if health costs just magically remain very low, and that’s basically what the administration (and to some extent the CBO) now project when assessing the law. The CBO assumes, for instance, that the IPAB wouldn’t even have to start doing anything at all until after 2022.

But that’s not all. The second large design problem that the rosy health-costs scenario allows the administration to ignore reaches even closer to the heart of Obamacare. After the law’s designers got their first real CBO score in 2009, they realized they had to find some way to cut the projected costs of the law’s exchange subsidies if they were to have any chance of pretending the law would cost less than a trillion dollars over a decade. So they inserted a provision that kicks in in 2018 and requires that, if the cost of the exchange subsidies exceeds 0.5 percent of GDP in any given year, the level of subsidy would be cut in a means-tested way. The provision didn’t draw much attention even from health wonks at first, but in 2011 the CBO produced an analysis of it showing that it would cause very significant declines not just in the growth of subsidies but in their nominal value year-over-year for many middle-class families. These families’ out-of-pocket costs would quickly grow larger than the penalty (or tax, for John Roberts fans) they would have to pay for not having coverage, and many could well opt to go uninsured until they needed care. (Jed Graham of Investors Business Daily has done some great reporting on this provision, especially here and here.)

Until this year, the CBO has always assumed that these families just wouldn’t drop their coverage, but in its latest score of Obamacare, the agency for the first time projects that the number of people in the exchanges will actually begin to drop after 2018, declining by almost a tenth over the subsequent five years even as the population grows. And since the people who remained in the exchanges would tend to be poorer and sicker, the costs of providing them subsidies would grow very quickly (by almost 6 percent annually), since the exchange pool would become more risky. (And this projection, remember, is still based on rosy expectations about overall health-cost growth.) This nightmare scenario, too, is pretty unlikely to happen, since the people involved would be middle-class families. They’re not going to accept the enormous downside of Obamacare without even the modest upside of exchange subsidies, and they’re not going to like being forced to go uninsured. The politics of this just wouldn’t hold.

In both cases, it is only possible to imagine that Obamacare might be sustained if we assume very low growth in health costs. That assumption is absolutely critical to liberal fiscal and health policy today. But of course, Obamacare doesn’t really offer any serious mechanism to achieve such low costs — in fact, it’s actively hostile to the kind of consumer incentives and competitive pressures it would take to achieve it.

These are just a few of the many increasingly evident reasons why Obamacare in its current form has no future. For now, you’ve got to dig pretty deep in your newspaper to see it. But it’s going to become clearer and clearer to real voters as implementation proceeds.
PM Netanyahu Comments on Start of Flow of Natural Gas from the Tamar Field

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, this evening (Saturday, 30 March 2013),
commented on the start of the flow of natural gas from the Tamar field:
"This is an important day for the Israeli economy. On the Festival of
Freedom we are taking an important step toward energy independence. We have advanced 
the natural gas sector in Israel over the last decade, which will be good
for the Israeli economy and for all Israelis."
3)The Danger of Freedom
By Rabbi Nathan Lopes Cardozo

One of the greatest lessons that Judaism has taught the world

 Freedom can be a very dangerous commodity.
When reading the story of the Exodus from Egypt, we are confronted with a strange phenomenon: the mashchis (destroyer). After the Jews were told to mark their doorposts with the blood of the korban pesach (paschal lamb), they were informed that G0D would pass over their doors "and He will not allow the destroyer (ha-mashchit) to enter your homes and attack you" (1). Later, at midnight, Moses would call them to leave their homes after they had had a family meal, and they would subsequently leave Egypt. Commentators struggle with the term "the destroyer." Who or what was this? G0D? A plague? Some other power?
One of the most remarkable explanations is that the destroyer was freedom itself. Often in history, national liberations were followed by long periods of chaos and violence. Many bloody and ruthless insurrections erupted by slaves eager to settle a score with their cruel masters. The brutish drive for vengeance, for gratification of the satanic impulses within man, was often irresistible. At the time of the French revolution, many of those who were liberated initiated mass killings. The same is true of the upheavals after the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. Victims of harsh slavery tend to throw off the shackles of moral behavior and become criminals themselves, taking their revenge on innocent bystanders. The turmoil that often follows the experience of sudden freedom is too much for people to handle.

When we look at the story of the Exodus, we are struck by the fact that an upheaval of revenge was completely absent. No Egyptian babies were snatched from the embrace of their mothers and thrown into the Nile, as had been done to the Jewish male babies just a short time before. Not one Jew beat up his taskmaster who mercilessly tortured him only a few days earlier. There was not one Egyptian hurt; nor was there an Egyptian house destroyed or vandalized.
At that crucial hour, when the Jews had the motivation, opportunity and ability to take revenge for 210 years of exceedingly cruel treatment, they chose to be restrained and quiet. Instead of rioting in the streets of Goshen, they remained in their homes, ate a festive meal—which included the korban pesach—sang praises to G0D, and waited until they were told to leave. Would anyone have blamed them for beating up a few taskmasters who had thrown their babies in the Nile? Yet, not one Jew raised a hand against his enemy. Once it was certain that they would be free at any moment, and that there was no longer a need to defend themselves, revenge would be meaningless.
This is one of the greatest lessons that Judaism has taught the world. Freedom should be experienced in a prudent manner, far removed from chaos, bloodshed and revenge.
Freedom can be very dangerous if one does not think it through, control it, and apply it carefully. It is therefore quite understandable that Pesach—which celebrates freedom, powerfully symbolized through the Seder rituals—has a large number of restrictions, to the extent that even a crumb of bread is forbidden. In our chaotic world, this is a most important lesson.
Today, when so much freedom has been given to man, most people do not know what they are free from. We have confused the free with the free and easy. "He only earns his freedom and existence," says Goethe, "who daily conquers them anew" (2).
4)Israel's apology to Turkey was a mistake
by Efraim Inbar
Israel's apology to Turkey for "operational errors" in the Mavi Marmara incident is a diplomatic mistake both in terms of substance and timing. It's hard to understand or justify Israel's weekend apology to Turkey. While the use of Israeli force in the Mavi Marmara "flotilla" incident was not very elegant, it was perfectly legitimate – as the UN-appointed "Palmer Commission" unequivocally determined. Moreover, the incident was a Turkish provocation that warrants a Turkish apology, not an Israeli one.

Worse still, the hopes in Jerusalem for a new era in Israeli-Turkish relations in exchange for the apology are simply illusory.

The Israeli apology will hardly stop Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's regular Israel-bashing rhetoric. Nor has it secured a clear Turkish commitment for the resumption of full diplomatic relations.

Moreover, Erdogan already has conveyed his intention to visit Hamas-ruled Gaza. Such a visit is a slap in the face to both Jerusalem and Washington.

Turkey, under the AKP, an Islamist party, has gradually adopted a new foreign policy, fueled by neo-Ottoman and Islamist impulses, whose goal is to gain a leadership role in the Middle East and the Islamic world.

Attaining this objective requires harsh criticism of Israel, which has generated great popularity for Erdogan and Turkey. Unfortunately, vicious attacks on Israel come easily for Erdogan, who is plainly and simply an anti-Semite.

Israel has failed to fully grasp Turkey's new Islamist direction. For several years already, we no longer have a pro-Western Turkey with which Israel can cooperate in the turbulent Middle East. Ankara and Jerusalem have very different views on a variety of issues. While Turkey is truly an important and powerful player in regional politics, its behavior over the past decade actually harms Israeli interests. It does not follow the US policy on Iran and helps circumvent the international sanctions imposed on Tehran. As a matter of fact, Turkey helps Iran, a country with genocidal intentions toward Israel, to progress in its nuclear program.

Turkey also sides with Hamas, an Islamist terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish state, and helps it entrench its rule in Gaza and gain international support and recognition.
Turkey is also actively helping radical Islamic Sunni elements take over Syria. It also supports the idea of violent opposition against Israel's presence in the Golan Heights. As such, the hope that Israel and Turkey can cooperate together with the US in limiting the damage from a disintegrating Syria has little validity.

Furthermore, Turkey, still a NATO member, is obstructing the efforts of Israel in developing its ties with this organization. The Turkish position in NATO also hinders the Western alliance's ability to deal more effectively with the Iranian nuclear challenge.

Turkey's policy in the Mediterranean similarly clashes with Israeli vital interests. Its bullying of Cyprus interferes with Israel's plans to export via this island its newly found gas riches to an energy- thirsty Europe. Turkey, that sees itself as an energy bridge to Europe, does not want the Israeli competition. It may even use military force to maintain its role in the energy market.
What is also important is how the Israeli apology will be perceived in a region whose prism on international relations is power politics. Inevitably, Israel under Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will be seen as weak, bowing to American pressure. Public regrets about use of force erode deterrence and project weakness.

Perceived weakness usually invites aggression in our tough neighborhood.

This is also what Ankara thinks, which is very problematic for Israel. Moreover, Tehran and Cairo, both ruled by radical Islamists, cherish the Turkish victory over the Zionist entity.

The Israeli-initiated apology is an American diplomatic success, but reflects a dangerous American misperception of Turkey as representing "moderate Islam," which is incredible naïve. Turkey is distancing itself from the West and its values.
Nowadays, more journalists are in jail in Turkey than in China.

Israel's friends in Turkey, part of the democratic opposition, must be bewildered as Israel hands Erdogan a diplomatic achievement, buttressing the grip of the Islamist AKP on Turkish politics.
The timing is particularly troubling.

Turkish foreign policy is in crisis because its much-heralded approach to the Middle East ("zero problems with its neighbors") is in shambles. Turkey needed a diplomatic success here more than Israel did. Israel could have negotiated a better formula to end the impasse in bilateral relations.

Only very recently, we heard Erdogan call Zionism a crime against humanity. He did not apologize, as he should have, but told a Danish newspaper that he was misunderstood.

This was part of a concerted effort on part of Turkey to prevent additional international criticism on this issue. Nevertheless, the pressure was on Ankara, not Jerusalem.

Furthermore, an apology to a Hamas supporter, just a day after Hamas again launched rockets against Israel, communicates terrible weakness. Sanctioning an Erdogan victory trip to Gaza at this particular moment is terribly foolish, too, particularly when Israel is seeking to bolster the standing of the rival Palestinian Authority.
It is highly unlikely that we will see a reversal or a turnaround in Turkey's anti-Western and anti- Israeli policies. The apology from Jerusalem only enhances Turkish ambitions and weakens Israel's deterrence.
Efraim Inbar is a professor of political studies at Bar-Ilan University, the director of the Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies and a fellow at the Middle East Forum.
5) Dr. Carson Banned from a Commencement Speech?

Ben Carson, the noted pediatric neurosurgeon, has become the target of a petition by Johns Hopkins students who want him removed as the medical school’s commencement speaker this spring.
Dr. Carson became a media sensation in January when he questioned Obamacare and progressive taxation in a speech to the National Prayer Breakfast as President Obama sat just a few feet away from him.
With his new prominence, Carson has apparently also riled some liberals, including these Johns Hopkins students. Last Tuesday, he told Sean Hannity of Fox News that “marriage is between a man and a woman. No group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn’t matter what they are, they don’t get to change the definition.”

That inappropriate comparison of gays to members of the North American Man/Boy Love Association and those who practice bestiality, along with his pointed criticisms of liberal policies at the prayer breakfast, prompted a petition demanding that he be replaced with another commencement speaker. Carson has responded by telling the Baltimore Sun the following:
I think people have completely taken the wrong meaning out of what I was saying. First of all, I certainly believe gay people should have all the rights that anybody else has. What I was basically saying is that as far as marriage is concerned that has traditionally been between a man and a woman and nobody should be able to change that.
                   Now perhaps the examples were not the best choice of words, and I certainly apologize if I                      offended anyone . . . But the point that I was making was that no group of individuals, whoever they are, whatever their belief systems, gets to change traditional definitions. The reason I believe the way I do, I will readily confess, is because I am a Christian who believes in The Bible.
Carson says he is willing to forego his commencement duties if he is formally asked to. He explained to the Sun today, “This is their graduation, their big day, and if they think me being there is going to be a problem, I am happy to withdraw.”

We’ll see if his apology is accepted. If it’s not, it will become clear that an authoritarian anti-free speech mindset has set in with many gay-marriage supporters. Free and open debate is vital to discussing public-policy issues. In fact, it was liberal Supreme Court justice Sonia Sotomayor who brought up the issue of bestiality during this week’s oral arguments on a gay-rights case, openly asking if the extension of marriage law to gays would open the courts up to lawsuits demanding equal marriage rights by polygamists and those who engage in bestiality.

Apparently, for many liberals, free-speech rights can be extended to people who agree with them or their allies, but those outside their circle had better be prepared for attempts to shut them up.

6)This Is Not A Mosquito!! Look closely....................Incredible

Saturday, March 30, 2013

Carson Is Now Being Trashed. Israel Is Sound!

Sign of the times:

My mate just hired an Eastern European cleaner, took her 15 hours to hoover the house.  Turns out she was a Slovak.

I've been charged with murder for killing a man with sandpaper.  To be honest I only intended to rough him up a bit.

Just A Reminder to those who stole Electrical Goods in Last Year's Riots....Your One Year Manufacturer's Warranty Runs Out Soon.

Japanese scientists have created a camera with a shutter speed so fast, they can now photograph a woman with her mouth shut.

A woman standing nude in front of a mirror says to her husband: 'I look horrible, I feel fat and ugly, pay me a compliment.'
He replies, 'Your eyesight is perfect.'

While on a road trip, an elderly couple
at a roadside restaurant for lunch.
After finishing their meal, they left the
restaurant, and resumed their trip.

When leaving, the elderly woman unknowingly
left her glasses on the table, and she didn't
miss them until they had been driving for about forty minutes.

By then, to add to the aggravation, they
had to travel quite a distance before
they could find a place to turn
in order to return to the restaurant
to retrieve her glasses.

All the way back, the elderly husband
became the classic grouchy old man.
He fussed and complained, and
his wife relentlessly during the
entire return drive. The more he
chided her,
the more agitated he became. He
just wouldn't let up for a single minute.

To her relief, they finally arrived at the restaurant.
As the woman got out of the
car, and hurried inside to retrieve
her glasses, the old
geezer yelled to her, 

While you're in there, you might as well
get my hat and the credit card.

The liberal's trashing of Dr. Ben Carson has begun!  

Why?  Because Carson stands as vivid testimony that most of the progressive and liberal policies and  pronouncements regarding their racial and social views are one big lie and produce the opposite of what they profess is their goal.  (See 1, 1a and  1b below.)
When a currency is backed by political guarantees it is worthless. 

Social Security receipts were supposed be be placed in a trust fund and Congress used them to cover their deficit spending. (See 2 below.)
Maybe Obama should let the Israeli's run our economy instead of bashing them. (See 3 below.)
1)The following is a radio commentary on what Dr. Carson has had to endure. 

The commentary....

I saw something last night, I have to tell you I just got viscerally sad. I became depressed and I didn't try to disguise it.  It was a feeling of utter frustration at what is happening in our country, particularly culturally. There is a personality on MSNBC whose name is Toure. He's black, and he is a young fool.
He is a classic example of somebody who is dangerous precisely because of what he thinks he knows that isn't right, and he took it upon himself to try to destroy Dr. Ben Carson. He did it in a vile, almost uncivilized manner. The things that he said about Ben Carson were just filthy. They were despicable. It was worse than calling him an Uncle Tom. What depressed me was that Toure -- this young fool Toure -- doesn't deserve to be in the same conversation with Ben Carson. This Toure could live a thousand years; he'll never be anywhere near what Ben Carson is.
And he doesn't get called on any of this trash that he talks.

His name is Toure Neblett. He's one of these guys that goes by the first name Toure, and he's just a young fool. An arrogant, condescending young fool. And, of course, he's afraid of Ben Carson.

Now, we talked about this last week. The Democrats and the Drive-By Media do not have anything on Ben Carson yet. They got nothing on him. He's stellar. He is an ideal citizen.  He's a wonderful human being. He performs surgery on the brains of babies. He saves lives. He has, as you all know now, an up-from-nothing story from Detroit, which is inspirational in every way the Democrat Party does not want African Americans to hear, and that's why Ben Carson is a threat. Ben Carson shows another way. He illustrates a route to success, productivity, contentment, citizenship that African Americans are told is not possible in this racist slave state known as the United States.

But there is Dr. Ben Carson, one of many examples, that illustrates the folly and the lies of the contentions that come from the civil rights coalition of the Democrat Party in this country.  So this young fool on MSNBC decides to attack Ben Carson on the basis that he's nothing but a white man's token, a white Republican's token. He's just perfect. He is nothing more than the latest black guy to come along that white people can accept and embrace for one reason only, and that is to prove they're not racists.

So Ben Carson's not worth anything to anybody. The only reason Republicans have embraced Ben Carson is because they can say, "Look, see, I got a black friend. I'm not a racist." And the reason this is depr essing to me is that Ben Carson ought to be held up as a role model for virtually everybody in this country. He doesn't harm anybody. He has no desire to harm anybody. He has no intention to harm anybody. I don't know him. I only know him via his media appearances, but that's enough. I know people who have met him, gotten to know him very well, and they have nothing but the kindest, greatest things to say about him.

He's making routine television appearances and they're playing sound bites of this young fool and his comments about tokenism and "step and fetch it," and he's responding to them with great class and great dignity. He said (paraphrasing), "Oh, this is a trick we learned in the third grade. If you can't deal with people, you just start calling them names and insulting." It was a very classy and artful put down of this young fool known as Toure.

But that's not enough for me. The fact that this is happening in our country and culture, frankly, folks, it just depresses me, that commentary like that is promoted, applauded, rewarded.  This was the epitome of despicable, and just vile stuff that was said about someone who is not even close to these kinds of allegations. It got me to thinking. And this is another thing that's very sad to me. There's a very sobering, depressing reality, and we all know it. But this event just drove it home even more. There's only one acceptable way to be black in America. Only one. Only one acceptable way to be black and it isn't Ben Carson.

Now, stop and think about that. Ben Carson, his life, his story, not good. Not worthy. Not acceptable within the Democrat Party and the civil rights coalition. If black liberals would work as hard at helping lift other blacks and other minorities out of the morass of misery that is life in the Democrat Party under socialism as they have worked hard to destroy people like Ben Carson, then maybe there might be some substantive, real demonstrative improvement for life of minorities in this country. But to turn one of the world's foremost baby brain doctors into some sort of "step and fetch it," some sort of vile token, shows just how ethically and morally and intellectually bankrupt the civil rights coalition of the Democrat Party has become.

Only one acceptable way to be black in America, and you'd better not choose the route that Ben Carson chose. And you better not choose the route that Clarence Thomas chose. Or Shelby Steele. Or I could give you lists of prominent African Americans from now to the end of this show and not one of them is worth even a modicum of respect in today's Democrat Party. And the fact that that party is triumphing, the fact that that party is considered the best place to be for minorities? It's the worst place for minorities to be. It is the worst place for the disadvantaged to be. It is the worst place for the discriminated against to be.

It is the absolute worst place for anybody to be, unless you're accepted in the elitist leadership circles of that party. Otherwise, your life isn't going to amount to anything. And if it does, then you're going to come under attack if you make something of yourself. If you are a minority in this country and you make something of yourself and you dare stray from the Democrat Party plantation, you are going to pay the price for that in terms of what is said about you in public. Your reputation will be in the crosshairs for destruction.

Now, to his credit, Ben Carson said, "If you don't have anything useful to say then you attack people. If you feel that your house of cards has been discovered and is starting to come unraveled, you become very desperate. Intelligent people tend to talk about the facts. They don't sit around and call each other names. That's what you can find on a third grade playground." And that's exactly right. MSNBC is a third grade playground and it's recess all the time and there are not any teachers.

Addressing the racial aspects of his detractors, Carson said, "They feel if that you look a certain way then you have to stay on the plantation." He said that he's been called an Uncle Tom. He rejects the term not for its racist context. He rejects the Uncle Tom label on the basis of its inaccuracy. He said obviously these young fools don't even know what an Uncle Tom is.  In the novel Uncle Tom was very subservient, kind of "go along to get along" type of guy. And Ben Carson said (paraphrasing), "That isn't what I am. I'm not subservient to anybody and I'm not bending and shaping and just floating along to try to get along." That's what Toure Neblett is, is an Uncle Tom, in the classic definition. Subservient, go along to get along, do what you have to do to survive and get fame and prominence in the Democrat Party. Basically just be a despicable human being.

Now, you can say that, "Ben Carson can take it." Yeah, I know he can take it. There are a lot of people that can take it. That's not the point to me. The point to me is that it is standard operating procedure for the Democrat Party today. That's normal behavior. That's rewarded. That's how you get promoted in the Democrat Party, and it's sick. It's despicable. It's dishonest. I don't have all the words to describe how just insane it all is.

We actually have Ben Carson responding to some of these vile insults that are coming his way. He was on with Megyn Kelly on Fox yesterday afternoon and she said, "Do you think that the people who just dismiss you as a token have a prejudice of their own?" 

CARSON: They feel that if you look a certain way, then you have to stay on the plantation. I've heard that some people referred to me as an Uncle Tom. Obviously they don't know what an Uncle Tom is. They need to read Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel Uncle Tom's Cabin to see that he was very subservient, kind of go-along-to-get-along type person. Obviously that's not what I'm doing. And what the left frequently does -- and some aspects of the right, too -- is they try to make life so unpleasant for anybody who disagrees with them that people will keep silent. I'm trying to get people to speak up because, you know, this country is changing into something else and we need to make sure that that we really want to change into something else and not just end up there and ask ourselves how did we get there.

That's pretty, pretty on point. The country's changing. One day people are going to wake up and say, "How the hell did this happen?" That's exactly right. In fact, some of you are probably sitting around saying, "I can't wait for that to happen." You can't wait for the day when all these young fools demanding all this stuff finally get it, and then it all falls apart on them and they wonder, "Well, what happened?" and you just say, "Well, we tried to tell you."
CALLER: Thank you so much. I was listening in and out today as I was in and out of the car and caught your Ben 

Carson comment earlier, who I just admire so much for having the courage of his convictions, regardless of the color of his skin. But then as you were talking about the Gulfstream jet and at the end of sort of popped in there humorously, "I wonder if Jay-Z has his yet," it struck me that it is acceptable to the left for a black man to be a successful musician or a successful athlete, but not to be a successful pediatric neurosurgeon.

Well, he could be a successful pediatric neurosurgeon if he were a left wing liberal loyal to the Democrat Party, believing in the state having power over all. If he would do that, he could do anything he wants. What we've learned with this thing that happened to Ben Carson is there's only one way to be black in America and be accepted. There's only one way. And you can't follow the route that Ben Carson did.

CALLER: Right. You have to tow the line.

Right. You can't have an up from nothing story unless you're going to credit the Democrat Party for your success, unless you're going to credit one of their programs for your success. Affirmative action quotas, you name it. Unless you're going to bow down and be loyal to some big government or a series of programs, you can't be black. You are going to be either authentically black or you're going to be an Uncle Tom.

CALLER: Right. Well, last night on TV when Carson was talking about he's looked at the one part of the body that makes you what you are, your brain, and the exterior is merely for variety in life. If people could just hear that, if he could just get that point across to the millions of people who need to hear it and let them think for themselves with that brain.

Here's what he said. I've got the quote right here. It was in response to the really mindless juvenile insults that were spewed by that young fool over at MSNBC. This is what Carson said: "I like to say the reason I don't talk about race that often is because I'm a neurosurgeon, and I look at the thing that actually makes the person who they are. It's not the cover. But for them the cover is everything because they are superficial thinkers."

That's Carson talking about the people focused on skin color, sexual orientation, gender, you name it, as the number one thing that identifies you. He was simply saying "I do work on what really makes the person who they are, their brain, particularly the brains of children." He's a world class neurosurgeon, and people respect him for his skills, for his humanity and his grace. Now they can respect him for his wit in responding to this.

But what is clearly the case now, there's only one way that you can be authentically black in America, only one, and somebody who is African American like Dr. Ben Carson cannot be authentically black. They will kick him out of the club. They will impugn and try to destroy his character and reputation and, if they could, his life. They are the ones, don't forget, who claim they have all the tolerance for diversity. They are the ones who claim to have all the compassion. They are the ones who claim to have the big hearted understanding. They are the ones, they claim, to have the big tent. They, in truth, are the narrow minded, exclusionary, small minded, peanut brain bigots. And they couldn't hold a candle to Ben Carson, not a one of them, and yet they have the audacity to insult him. His humanity is really what they're insulting when they take after him the way they did.


1a)Carson Willing to Step Down as Commencement Speaker After Protests
By Greg Richter

A pediatric neurosurgeon who has become the darling of conservatives since speaking against nationalized healthcare is now under fire for comments he made about same-sex marriage.

Dr. Benjamin Carson told MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports” on Friday that he would be willing to step down as commencement speaker at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine after faculty and students signed petitions asking that he not speak.

“I would say this is their day, and the last thing I would want to do is rain on their parade,” Carson told Mitchell.

Carson said in the interview that he has not notified the university he won’t be speaking. “I am waiting for appropriate channels,” he said. “I don’t think television is the appropriate channel.”

The petitions began after Carson told Fox News Channel’s Sean Hannity, “My thoughts are that marriage is between a man and a woman. It’s a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and no group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality — it doesn’t matter what they are — they don’t get to change the definition.”

One of the petitions, quoted by The Hill newspaper, reads: “We retain the highest respect for Dr. Carson’s achievements and value his right to publicly voice political views. Nevertheless, we feel that these expressed values are incongruous with the values of Johns Hopkins and deeply offensive to a large proportion of our student body.”

MSNBC’s web report on the story says Carson equating same-sex marriage with pedophilia and bestiality has caused him to lose some of his star power within the GOP. Carson has said he would consider a run for president if the public was still interested in him a year-and-a-half from now.

Carson apologized for his choice of words in a Baltimore Sun story on Friday, but not for his position.

“First of all, I certainly believe gay people should have all the rights that anybody else has,” Carson told the Sun. “What I was basically saying is that as far as marriage is concerned, that has traditionally been between a man and a woman and nobody should be able to change that.”

Carson came into the national spotlight in February after criticizing healthcare and other policies of President Barack Obama at the National Prayer Breakfast while Obama was sitting just a few feet away on the same dais. He also drew applause when he spoke to the Conservative Political Action Conference earlier this month

1b) 5 Groups Of Obama Voters That Are Being Crushed By Democrats
By John Hawkins

Hollywood, the mainstream media and the public school system are all almost entirely controlled by people and groups friendly to the Democrat Party. Yet and still, even with that almost overwhelming advantage, Democrats can't do any better than a rough parity with the Republicans. If the tables were turned and the GOP controlled what you see on TV, in the news and what your kids are taught at school the same way the Democrats do, the Republican Party would win every presidential election and would permanently maintain unassailable majorities in Congress.
So, why aren't the Democrats running away with every election? Because selling Democrat policies is like Coca-Cola's marketing team trying to sell the public on rat spit in a bottle. Since they can't sell their product, they spend all their time convincing the public that the little Republican girls down the street selling lemonade probably spit in it when their mothers aren't looking. Sadly, this tactic works pretty well and a lot of Democrats end up voting for people who are ruining their lives.
1) Black Americans: Over the last few decades, no group has been more fiercely loyal to the Democrats than black Americans. Typically, the Democrats capture 90% of the black vote nationwide. However, it's worth asking what black Americans actually get out of that deal. Sure, if you're Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or Touré, it's a pretty good gig, but how does the average black American benefit from voting for the Democrats? Affirmative Action? That program helps very few people and it also leads to many black Americans getting into a college that they wouldn't normally qualify for with their academic record. Some people might call that a plus, but as a practical matter, it causes an inordinate number of the brightest, most promising young black Americans to flunk out of collegewhen they could have graduated had they gone to less challenging schools.
In return for that dubious bit of "help," the Democrats fight voucher programs that could get black students out of failing schools, laugh at black Americans who are Christian, pro-life and believe in God's definition of marriage and they do nothing of consequence to tackle the crime and drug problems that makes life so unbearable for many black Americans. The worst places in our country for black Americans to live are inevitably run by Democrats who've long since given up on improving the lives of their constituents.
Economically, black Americans are still suffering under the Democrats as well. The numbers are so bad that they're almost hard to believe. "In 2009, the average net worth for white households was $113,149 and $5,700 for black households”while the unemployment rate for black Americans is double the rate for whites. Black Americans deserve a lot better than that from the people who serve them in government.
2) Single Women: Did you know that Mitt Romney actually won married women 53-47 over Obama? However, Obama won single women in a landslide and that's not unusual. Single women tend to go heavily for the Democrats. The sad thing about that is Democrats pull it off by baiting a trap. They promise free birth control and abortion. They offer up welfare, food stamps and other programs that are designed to shoulder the financial load that a husband would in normal circumstances. Then they proceed to denigrate, demean and slime any conservative woman who opposes those things in the most vicious, nasty and grotesque manner possible.
Because a single woman struggling to survive is likely to take any help she can get from the Democrats and will return the favor by voting for them. On the other hand, a woman who's successful, financially secure and married is much more likely to vote Republican. This is true across every race, religion and demographic group. This is why, for example, Democrats haveengineered a system where in many cases, "the single mom is better off earning gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income and benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income and benefits of $57,045.” They don't WANT single women to be independent and financially secure because that would make them more likely to vote Republican.
No woman grows up wanting to stay permanently poor, single and dependent on the government for her survival, but for the Democrats to succeed, they need as many women as possible stuck in exactly that position.
3) Unions: Even though the union membership is a little more split, the union bosses have thrown their lot in with the Democrat Party. This has paid some dividends for them because undeniably, the Democrats are bending over backwards to appease the unions. However, there is a heavy price to be paid for being totally tied to one political party.
For one thing, union membership is death spiraling into oblivion. At one point, 34% of Americans were in a union, but now that number is down to "11.9 percent, the lowest rate in more than 70 years."
Furthermore, because of the staggering cost of some of the pension deals that unions have previously negotiated for their members, there are cities and states facing a choice between honoring their previous agreements with unions or going bankrupt. What that means is that like it or not, union members are about to start taking haircuts all across the country.
Since unions have allied themselves entirely with the Democrats, Republicans have every incentive to hurt the unions when they can, thwart any rule changes that would allow unions to grow and to try to cut as deeply as possible from the unions in any sort of bankruptcy deals. Sure, siding with the Democrats might maximize any gains that unions have already made, but it also almost guarantees their coming descent into oblivion.
4) Young Americans: One of the best things about being young is that feeling of invulnerability that comes with it. You hear about all the terrible things that happen to other people, but you'll be the one that gets by with it, right?
Unfortunately, it's not working out like that for a lot of young Americans who made the mistake of trusting Barack Obama. It's bad enough that they have a jobless rate under Obama that's nearly double the national average, but he's running up the national credit card with an unsustainable level of debt that younger Americans are going to be asked to pay off.
If you're under 25, by the time you hit your prime earning years, you're likely to face bleak long term economic prospects because of our massive debt load along with the crushing taxes that will be required to pay for it. Worse yet, the entitlement programs so many Americans rely on are now in terrible danger because of the reckless spending the Democrats are insisting on. As Ann Coulter has frequently noted,
“I don’t know why Republicans keep saying we have to cut spending to save these entitlements for our grandchildren. We have to cut spending to save these entitlement programs for 45 year-olds. On our current spending rate, 45 year-olds will not receive any Medicare.”
Does that sound appealing? Struggling under a high tax burden to pay off debts that you didn't run up with much less of a safety net than the last few generations of Americans? That's what young Americans are heading towards and the saddest thing is, they're voting for it. It's not even a case where young Americans are going to be partying and then paying the price later. It's even worse because the Democrats are partying with their money and plan to stick them with the bill.
5) Hispanic Americans Although there are a few exceptions, Hispanic Americans have voted for the Democrats by a roughly 3-to-1 margin over the past few decades. What have Hispanic Americans gotten in return for that? Democrats block school choice initiatives that would allow Hispanic Americans to send their kids to better schools. They also create massive amounts of red tape that make it much harder for Hispanic small business owners to become successful. In fact, if you're a Hispanic American who wants a piece of the American Dream, you'd be hard pressed to come up with anything that the Democrats do for you other than their one supposed "trump card" -- they're in favor of illegal immigration.
The great irony of illegal immigration is that Hispanic Americans are economically hurt by illegal immigration much more than the average American because they're more likely to be going head-to-head in the same professions with people who often don't pay taxes, don't pay for health care and don't pay for car insurance. There are undoubtedly millions of Hispanic Americans who've followed every rule and done everything right who don't have jobs today because of illegal aliens. There are also millions of other Hispanic Americans who are taking home $3 or $4 less per hour than they otherwise would without illegal aliens driving down the cost of labor.
Furthermore, for all the complaints about illegal immigration, the dirty little secret is that some sort of compromise that allows illegal aliens to stay in the country as guest workers, but not citizens, would probably be very passable in Congress. The real reason that isn't happening is because it would allow Hispanic Americans to see how badly they're being hurt by people who aren't in the country legally. When you want to work, but can't feed your family because you don't have a job and you see a "guest worker" from a foreign country holding a position you desperately need, your attitude starts to change in a hurry. The Democrats understand that and secretly like the idea that illegal aliens make it harder on Hispanic Americans. After all, the more successful you become, the less you want the Democrats to do anything other than get out of your way.

2) Global Reserve Currency Should Be Backed by Real Reserves
By Barry Elias

Sovereign currency manipulation can be severely curtailed if we require the currency to be backed by real reserve assets, such as gold and silver.

The reserve requirement would be similar to that used by banks to guarantee they have adequate capital to cover future losses. These bank losses can arise from loan defaults, poor asset/liability transformation and inadequate investment strategies.

In the case of currency reserves, the reserve assets would represent 10 to 20 percent of the total money supply. It would require an investment of labor, capital and raw materials to produce these assets, which become a proxy for the cost of production in the general economy. This investment would preclude a distortion of resource allocation by sovereign interests.

The current and projected supply of gold and silver would be adequate to provide this level of protection. This methodology would help reduce the excess credit and debt formation that has wreaked havoc with our global financial system and undermined our economies.

In the past, we only used a gold reserve to back currencies based on a fixed price of gold. For this strategy to work, gold and silver must have a floating price mechanism to accurately reflect the true demand and supply of these commodities, ensure purchase price parity across time and geographic areas and prevent excessive sovereign currency manipulation.

3)  Israel’s Economy has the Power to Astound

Israel is Prospering​. Time For Her to be On Guard
Good news for Israel is bad news to her enemies and Jew-haters of all stripes. The stronger and more prosperous Israel becomes, and as her permanence and indispensability become too obvious to ignore, the greater the mad frenzy of the fiends who wish she were gone. This may sound cynical, but it is also the truth. 
 By Yoram EttingerinFocus Quarterly, Jewish Policy Center2013

Global agencies assess Israel
During 2012, the three leading global credit rating companies, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) commended Israel’s economic performance and expressed confidence in its long-term viability
On September 30, 2012, Standard and Poor’s (S&P) reaffirmed Israel’s A+ credit rating, at a time when it lowered the credit rating of an increasing number of Western countries. According to S&P, "the Israeli economy continues to generate solid economic growth…. Major security risks will be contained…. There is sufficient political will to prevent a sizable increase in the government's debt burden…. We forecast that by the middle of the decade domestic natural gas production should contribute to improved external and fiscal balances.”
On September 3, 2012, Moody’s sustained Israel’s A1 credit rating, stating that “Israel’s stable outlook is underpinned by the country's high economic, institutional and government financial strength…supported by its relatively high GDP per capita [US$32, 000] and its economic resilience…. The country's specialized-export sector is well-positioned to rebound quickly should the global environment normalize….Moody's judges Israel's susceptibility to event risk as moderate based on the political risks facing the country, both domestic and external…. Israel's own gas production will increase substantially between 2013 and 2016.”
On April 23, 2012, Fitch Ratings maintained Israel's long-term foreign exchange and local currency credit rating at A and A+ respectively, despite the ongoing war on Palestinian terrorism, the Iranian nuclear threat and the raging Arab Street. Fitch cited “Israel's strong institutions and solid recent macroeconomic performance, rich, diversified economy and strong external balance sheet against a high level of government debt and longstanding geopolitical concerns."

On April 2, 2012, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) published its annual report on Israel’s economy: “Israel's economy remains strong… led by robust private consumption and buoyant investment…. Israel’s fundamentals are strong: inflation and inflation expectations are squarely within the 1-3 percent target range; unemployment is at historic lows; the net international investment position is a surplus; and public debt has fallen steadily to below 75 percent of GDP…. The Israeli financial system currently appears to be generally robust…. The current combination of external threats and the relative stability of the domestic system are propitious for strengthening the crisis management framework….” The IMF report adds that the recent discoveries of natural gas fields may transform Israel to a net energy exporter in coming years. 

Israel’s economic indicators
While most of the world is afflicted by an economic meltdown, Israel demonstrates fiscal responsibility, sustained economic growth and a conservative, well-regulated banking system with no banking or real estate bubble.

For example, from a 450% galloping inflation in 1984, Israel managed to holdinflation in check – 1.6% in 2012. Israel’s budget deficit and unemployment were 4.2% and 6.9% respectively in 2012, significantly lower than the OECD average of 7% and 8%. 

During the 2009-2012 global economic crisis – without a stimulus package and in spite of the stoppage of the natural gas supply from Egypt, which increased energy cost - Israel experienced a 14.7% growth of gross domestic product (GDP), the highest among OECD countries. Israel led Australia (10.7%), Canada (4.8%), USA (3.2%), Germany (2.7%), France (0.3%) and the Euro Bloc which suffered a 1.5% decline in GDP. Israel’s 2012 GDP growth (3.3%) leads the OECD which averaged 1.4%, higher than the US (2.2%) and Canada (2%), but lower than India (4.5%) and China (7.5%). 

Israel’s GDP of $250BN in 2012 catapulted 120 times since 1948. From $1,132 and $19,836 GDP per capita in 1962 and 2000 respectively, Israel surged to $32,000 GDP per capita in 2012While the debt/GDP ratio – a key indicator for the rating companies – is the Achilles’ heel of most countries, Israel has managed to reduce it rapidly. From about 100% in 2002, it was compressed to 75% in 2012, compared with the OECD average of 78%.

The Bank of Israel foreign exchange reserves – which are critical to sustain global confidence in Israel’s economy and Israel’s capabilities during emergencies – soared from $25BN in 2004 to $75BN in 2012, 26th in the world and one of the top per capita countries. The Swiss-based Institute for Management Development (IMD) ranks the Bank of Israel (Israel’s “Federal Reserve”) among the top five central banks in its 2012 World Competitiveness Yearbook for the third year in a row.

Recognizing Israel’s promising economic indicators, Kasper Villiger, Chairman of the United Bank of Switzerland (UBS) indicated that China, Hong Kong, Brazil, Russia and Israel are the future growth engines for UBS. Deloitte Touche, one of the top four global CPA firms opined that Israel is the fourth most attractive site for overseas investors, trailing the USA, Brazil and China, but ahead of India, Canada, Singapore, Taiwan, Australia, England, Germany and Japan.

Israel – the high-tech country

According to Warren Buffet, one of the most successful and conservative investors in the world: "If you’re going to the Middle East to look for oil, you can skip Israel.However, if you’re looking for brains, look no further. [Israel] has a disproportionate amount of brains and energy.” In 2006, Berkshire Hathaway, Buffett’s investment company, made its first ever acquisition outside the US, in Israel, purchasing 80% of the Israeli company Iscar for $4 billion. In his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway’s stockholders, Buffett defined the Iscar investment as “the highlight of the year,” adding that “at Iscar, as throughout Israel, brains and energy are ubiquitous (New York Sun, March 2).” 

Eric SchmidtGoogle’s Executive Chairman, has been a frequent investor in Israel’s high-tech via his own private venture capital fund, Innovation Endeavors. He considers Israel “the most important high-tech center in the world after the US,” which will have an oversized impact on the evolution of the next stage of technology. In fact, Google established a large engineering and sales operation in Israel, whose achievements are definitely world-class.

Intel has led the pack of some 400 global high tech giants which operate in Israel. Intel features, in Israel, four research and development centers, two manufacturing plants and investments in 64 Israeli start ups. Intel’s President and CEO, Paul Otellini, revealed that "we are the largest private employer in Israel (8,200 employees), and most of those employees have technological know-how. Some of our most sophisticated engineering efforts are carried out in Israel…. We have been in Israel for 40 years and we have done many things. We're here for the long term.
Wall Street Journal book review of The Start Up Nation reported that “Steve Ballmer[Microsoft’s CEO] calls Microsoft as much an Israeli company as an American company, because of the importance of its Israeli technologies. Google, Cisco, Intel, Microsoft, eBay…live and die by the work of [their] Israeli teams.... Israel, a tiny nation of immigrants torn by war, has managed to become the first technology nation…."
Highlighting Israel’s emergence as a high-tech superpower and a unique ally of the US, 
George Gilderthe author of The Israel Test and a high-tech guru, wrote in The Wall Street Journal:"Israel cruised through the recent global slump with no deficit or stimulus package… It is the global master of microchip design, network algorithms and medical instruments…water recycling and desalinization…missile defense, robotic warfare, and UAVs…[supplying] Intel with many of its microprocessors (Pentium, Sandbridge, Atom, Centrino)… Cisco with new core router designs and real-time programmable network processors… [supplying]Apple with miniaturized memory systems for its iPhones, iPods and iPads, and Microsoft with user interface designs for the OS7 product line and the Kinect gaming motion-sensor interface….U.S. defense and prosperity increasingly depend on the ever-growing economic and technological power of IsraelIf we stand together we can deter or defeat any foe…. We need Israel as much as it needs us.”

The high-tech giants don’t just talk the Israel-talk; they walk the Israeli-walk.For instance, Cisco just made its 11th Israeli acquisition, acquiring IntuCell for $475MN; IBM acquired WorkLight for $60MN, its 11th Israeli acquisition; Sequoia Capital, one of the world leading venture capital funds, introduced its 5th Israeli-dedicated $200MN fund; Hong Kong’s $22.5BN Sir Li Ka-Shing, the 9th wealthiest person in the world, made his 7th Israeli investment; ChemChina acquired 60% of Agan for $1.44BN; Siemens acquired solar energy Solel ($418MN) and 40% of Arava Power ($15MN); Apple made its 1st Israeli acquisition – its first research and development center outside the USA – acquiring Anobit for $400MN; the Dallas-based DG acquired MediaMind $517MN; etc..

Israel’s competitive edge

Israel attracts the elite of global high-tech due to its competitive edge, offering a unique high-tech environment. For instance, the Shanghai Jiaotong University’s Academic Ranking of World Universities - one of 3 most influential rankings – includes four Israeli universities among the top thirty computer science universities in the world. Twenty universities are from the US, four from Israel, two each from Canada and the UK and one each from Switzerland and Hong Kong. 

Israel leads the world in its research and development manpower per capita: 140 Israelis (per 10,000) and 85 Americans (per 10,000) are ahead of the rest of the world.Israel’s qualitative workforce benefits from the annual Aliya (immigration of Jews) of skilled persons from the former USSR, Europe, the USA, Latin America and Australia, who join Israeli graduates from Israeli institutions of higher learning. In addition, Israel’s high-tech absorbs veterans of the elite high-tech units of Israel Defense ForcesIsrael’s defiance of unique security and economic challenges has produced unique, innovative and cutting edge solutions, technologies and production lines. Israel’s informal society has also nurtured ongoing interaction between the academic, research, military and industrial sectors. Moreover, Israel’s robust demography – which leads the Free World with three births per Jewish woman – provides a tailwind for Israel’s economy.

In order to sustain its competitive high-tech edge, Israel dedicates 4.5% of its GDP to research and development, the highest proportion in the world, ahead of the OECD (2.3%), Sweden (3.8%), Finland (3.5%), South Korea (3.4%), Japan (3.3%), the US (2.8%), Germany (2.7%) and Canada (1.7%). 

In advance of Israel’s 64th anniversary, Nicky Blackburn, editor and Israel Director of “Israel 21st Century”, wrote: “With the most startups per capita worldwide, and the third highest number of patents per head,Israel has become one of the leading players in the world of high-tech innovation, attracting international giants to its shores. From health breakthroughs to technology, agriculture, the environment and the arts, the country’s innovations are transforming and enriching lives everywhere. Israel today is playing a significant role in some of the most important challenges facing our planet.”

In hindsight, the ongoing wars and terrorism, since Israel’s establishment in 1948, have been just bumps on the way to unprecedented economic and technological growthWall Street is much more pertinent than the Gaza Strip!